It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

California - Almost One Million Bernie Sanders Ballots Illegally Shredded

page: 3
30
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 4 2016 @ 04:44 PM
link   
a reply to: AlaskanDad

As Hillary would say: "What Difference At This Point Does It Make?"

Almost Half of the country will still vote for her regardless of what she does.




posted on Jul, 4 2016 @ 05:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: essentialtremorsoh yeah that would be another thing if this were true.
All the ballots lost were for Bernie. Riiiiiiight !
How moronic.

Do you go out of your way to be obtuse? It doesn't matter if they were all for Sanders, or not. If they were shredding and not counting votes then it is voter fraud. Seeing as a good bit had to be for Hillary, I would actually assume you would be upset about this.



posted on Jul, 4 2016 @ 05:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: AlaskanDad

One simple question, which candidate has shown honesty and which campaign hires CTR trolls?


Bernie has no street credit, Hillary has plenty. That's a pretty big deal to many Democrats.



posted on Jul, 4 2016 @ 06:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Bone75

The only credibility Hilley has, is that she has is a history of living in the grey area, a place that is between what is legal and that that is not legal. She is definitely a known player, yet has had a tough time of it running against an unknown from Vermont even with the DNC backing her all the way.

Simply put she is just a loser, that the tptb want to use as a tool to fleece the US of A.

The HRC machine is just a tool for banks and corporations to use in their agenda towards globalization and the NWO.

Go Hilley!

Go to jail that is!



edit on 4-7-2016 by AlaskanDad because: typo clean up



posted on Jul, 4 2016 @ 06:56 PM
link   



Thus, pollsters were quite accurate in predicting the outcome, but only in states where fraud is hardest to hide. This situation is completely flipped in the states where the placed vote cannot be verified, as the vote only ever existed in the machines.

It is quite possible that the vote in these states was, in fact, manipulated. Studies conducted by teams of computer scientists at Princeton, NYU, and UCSD show that the machines from all major companies, such as the AVC Advantage made by Sequoia (now owned by Dominion), have severe security issues and are very vulnerable to network viruses. Despite this fact, there is very little state or federal regulation of the machines, and regulations regarding intellectual property have often prevented independent research.

Apart from the security problems, many researchers have posited that the biggest danger does not come from the outside, but from the inside. Most of the election companies have been mired in controversy, both in terms of conflicts of interest and having been convicted of white collar crime.


source



posted on Jul, 4 2016 @ 07:02 PM
link   

a reply to: Bone75

Bernie has no street credit, Hillary has plenty. That's a pretty big deal to many Democrats.


My bad, in your mention of street credit, I did not realize you were talking Wall Street credit, you are correct she definitely has more Wall Street credit then Sen Sanders! Corporate Hilley!



posted on Jul, 4 2016 @ 08:34 PM
link   
a reply to: IsntLifeFunny

That was just going to show the overall incredulousness of the whole thing.
It's ridiculous. When details like that slip past the writer.
Oh never mind.



posted on Jul, 4 2016 @ 08:44 PM
link   
I think you should be given a confirmation number when you vote, so you can track your ballot and make sure it was counted. There should be a website you can go to and plug in your voter receipt number and see what happened to your ballot after voting. Was it scanned? Was it hand counted? Did your vote count for the person you actually voted for?

People, its 2016. There's no excuse. We should have ballot tracking and accountability.

Regardless if this story is true or not, the issue still stands. We have the technology to assign a unique number to each ballot so that it can be tracked/traced around.

Perhaps a sticker that's peeled off the ballot and given to you when you drop it in the box or hand it in. There's nothing that ties your name/identity to the ballot -- but you walk away with a unique serial number that you can plug into a website to see the status of the ballot.

Ballots come in boxes for districts anyway, I've never seen anyone tie a specific ballot to a name. I've only seen names checked off a roster after they hand you a random ballot. Each random ballot would have a random number. At each stage of the ballot counting process it would be scanned just like a FedEx package.

Jesus people, we have the tech to do this...



posted on Jul, 4 2016 @ 08:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
I think you should be given a confirmation number when you vote, so you can track your ballot and make sure it was counted. There should be a website you can go to and plug in your voter receipt number and see what happened to your ballot after voting. Was it scanned? Was it hand counted? Did your vote count for the person you actually voted for?

People, its 2016. There's no excuse. We should have ballot tracking and accountability.

Regardless if this story is true or not, the issue still stands. We have the technology to assign a unique number to each ballot so that it can be tracked/traced around.

Perhaps a sticker that's peeled off the ballot and given to you when you drop it in the box or hand it in. There's nothing that ties your name/identity to the ballot -- but you walk away with a unique serial number that you can plug into a website to see the status of the ballot.

Ballots come in boxes for districts anyway, I've never seen anyone tie a specific ballot to a name. I've only seen names checked off a roster after they hand you a random ballot. Each random ballot would have a random number. At each stage of the ballot counting process it would be scanned just like a FedEx package.

Jesus people, we have the tech to do this...


The problem is, the people who don't want traceability of votes would launch a campaign to convince the average American voter that it's merely a clandestine method of tracing the VOTER rather than the vote.

So this will never happen.

I do agree with you, however.



posted on Jul, 4 2016 @ 09:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: IsntLifeFunny

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: essentialtremorsoh yeah that would be another thing if this were true.
All the ballots lost were for Bernie. Riiiiiiight !
How moronic.

Do you go out of your way to be obtuse? It doesn't matter if they were all for Sanders, or not. If they were shredding and not counting votes then it is voter fraud. Seeing as a good bit had to be for Hillary, I would actually assume you would be upset about this.


Well that sure isn't the narrative being pushed by this article or the OP.

Are you being obtuse?

We're supposed to believe
A) That somewhere between 350k- 3mil votes were shredded. Without ANY proof what so ever and
B) That they were all Bernie ballots.

Please explain your definition of obtuse.

Johnson/Weld 2016



posted on Jul, 4 2016 @ 09:55 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

Thats actually a damn good idea.

I can track my Amazon package but not my vote.



posted on Jul, 4 2016 @ 10:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Greggers

Yeah but it's not like that. The only person who could track their ballot would be the voter themselves. The ballot would contain a peel off sticker like the McDonalds Monopoly pieces with a number on it that matches the number on the ballot.

How anyone could trace that back to the voter is beyond me.

People love those stupid Monopoly games at McDonalds.



posted on Jul, 4 2016 @ 10:12 PM
link   
I think the biggest hurdle would be the government themselves. There's to much election fraud going on by both parties to allow something like this.

I'm not talking about voter fraud, but election fraud. Voter fraud is like someone voting 4 times. Election fraud is not counting ballots correctly, shredding them or tampering with electronic voting machines.

Election fraud happens much more than voter fraud, and its something that I don't think those in power would want to suddenly be scrutinized.

I can order a camera lens from Russia via international post and track it all across the globe -- but I can't be sure my vote even got counted?

What is this? Really?



posted on Jul, 4 2016 @ 10:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: Greggers

Yeah but it's not like that. The only person who could track their ballot would be the voter themselves. The ballot would contain a peel off sticker like the McDonalds Monopoly pieces with a number on it that matches the number on the ballot.

How anyone could trace that back to the voter is beyond me.

People love those stupid Monopoly games at McDonalds.


For those inclined to believe in conspiracy theories, I'm sure some mechanism to trace it back to the voter could be explained, likely in great detail.

I can think of a few off the top of my head, but I haven't spent enough time considering whether they would even be worth it or if they even make any sense-- but that's beside the point.



posted on Jul, 5 2016 @ 01:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: Greggers

Yeah but it's not like that. The only person who could track their ballot would be the voter themselves. The ballot would contain a peel off sticker like the McDonalds Monopoly pieces with a number on it that matches the number on the ballot.

How anyone could trace that back to the voter is beyond me.

People love those stupid Monopoly games at McDonalds.


They could check the ip adress that entered the voting number online. Most would use a smart phone they already logged all their details into.

it's too easy to trace who the person voted for. Anything you do online can be traced. Even if you delete it.

Good idea though.



posted on Jul, 5 2016 @ 01:44 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen



What a joke.

The story?
Yeah. What makes it funny is that people want to believe it so bad.



posted on Jul, 5 2016 @ 08:03 AM
link   
a reply to: AlaskanDad


In California there is just ONE county which uses an Open Source System to audit votes. Could that be why Bernie had 68% of the vote in Humboldt County? It was his highest vote share in ALL 58 counties! The system is a deterrent to fraud.


If Bernie would have taken California by 68% percent we would be looking at a contested convention for the DNC.
You can't claim any momentum if you lose the biggest state like that right at the end of the primary.
It was a must win state for Hillary, I am not surprised. Don't know how all the Bernie fans here at ATS can vote for her now.

It will be a good day when Trump unexpectedly comes from behind and beats her.
edit on 5-7-2016 by Blue_Jay33 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 5 2016 @ 08:32 AM
link   
There's a name connected to this - Michael Vu, San Diego County vote registrar. A lawsuit has been filed against his "counting" of primary votes. I recognize that name. May be a different guy, but he has been around when there were ballot issues going on in Ohio and Indiana too. Late 90s. Early 2000s. Curious coincidence?

Maybe looking at the history of the machines is in order too. It's not a pretty history. Very suspect. The votes from California never made sense. Even with AP shamefully calling the primary for Clinton the day prior to that primary.

Is Sanders looking at this mess, the lawsuits against the DNC, and the Clinton Foundation, the insanely high negative polls for Clinton and Trump, the FBI...all of it, and wondering if he needs to put his name on the Nov. ballot? I'm beginning to think he has to run. Absolutely has to.

Thanks for sharing this. Something not right happened in California voting. If they shredded ballots...drastic decisions are needed.



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 02:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: essentialtremors

originally posted by: IsntLifeFunny

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: essentialtremorsoh yeah that would be another thing if this were true.
All the ballots lost were for Bernie. Riiiiiiight !
How moronic.

Do you go out of your way to be obtuse? It doesn't matter if they were all for Sanders, or not. If they were shredding and not counting votes then it is voter fraud. Seeing as a good bit had to be for Hillary, I would actually assume you would be upset about this.


Well that sure isn't the narrative being pushed by this article or the OP.

Are you being obtuse?

We're supposed to believe
A) That somewhere between 350k- 3mil votes were shredded. Without ANY proof what so ever and
B) That they were all Bernie ballots.

Please explain your definition of obtuse.

Johnson/Weld 2016

I never discussed the veracity of the story. I was pointing out a known spammer who was going off the basis it was a true story, and that it didn't matter if it was true because not all of the ballots could be for Sanders. Since that was his point of entry I followed it up with beginning from the point of his contention being nonsensical.



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Im pretty sure even if they did shred some bernie votes Hillary won by a good amount.

The demographics in California are all in Hillarys favor.

She has the Latino vote...
She has the Black vote...
She has the White vote of everyone over 35...

Hillary won give it up man



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join